Salut/Hi >,

le/on 12 Feb 2004 10:30:36 -0500, tu disais/you said:-

> What better way of sharing with the afw friends I've made, than by
> tasting a friendly bottle together. And I can't. GRRRR.
>
>Ian, who says you *can't*<ggg> I'm sure there's SOMEwhere you could plop
>one of those small, sweet bottles and have it not be noticed!

With one of my fellow countrymen jailed for several weeks for making asinine
remarks to a customs official, I'm NOT about to smuggle alcohol. I already
bring "canned goods" (foie gras, confit etc) in which I can reasonably claim
to have described adequately, but if I got caught bringing _alcohol_
undeclared into MA, I would have the lot confiscated, and at $50-$60 a
bottle, and $30-$40 a can, the risk isn't worth it.

--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Salut/Hi Emery Davis,

le/on Thu, 12 Feb 2004 21:48:58 +0100, tu disais/you said:-


>] >My impression is that the "doggie bag" is embarassing to the French generally.
>] >Just MHO of course.
>]
>] I've never seen it on the food front, nor on carafe wines, and I'd not ask
>
>On the food front, I've seen a separate plate supplied for the doggie under
>the table, more than once!

Good lord!! I create a heck of a fuss when punters - err clients try to feed
human food to their pampered pooches. (AFAIC if the client wants me to feed
the dog, s/he should order a meal and pay for it). I won't have animals at
table.

>] people are going to go po-faced if I ask to bring a half bottle home! What
>] they think or say when I've gone, I don't know.
>]
>
>I wouldn't worry about it personally.

I don't! I do my best to conform to local custom, in so far as it doesn't do
too much violence to the way we like to live our lives.

> In these parts, where people I've known for 10 years still refer to me as "l'americain," I think
>I'd disappoint if I didn't exhibit the occasional bit of eccentric behavior.

Chuckle.. despite being here for 14 years, we're "Les Anglais" although
there are several other brit expatriates in the commune!

>Back onT: just tried to find the wine to match rabbit with turnips and calvados;
>attempted a '98 Rasteau (La Soumade Confiance) in the hope of standing up to
>it, with weak results: it wilted in front of its adversary. Any ideas for what I might
>have tried? "Really big" was a proverbial spam advertizement...

I don't do bunny like that, (I'm not over fond of turnips) although we do a
recipe where it's marinated in red wine and cooked in that, with prunes. I
also do a recipe for Mouton à la Poitevine, where slices of mutton leg are
stewed with cognac and garlic - a lot of garlic - a GREAT deal of garlic.
For the bunny, I serve a random red, something like Tour des Gendres Cuvée
classique. For the mutton (not lamb, btw) I use a far bigger wine, a madiran
or a big cahors. Until Oullins, I didn't have much Rhone wine. Intersting
dilemma, with the calva pushing one way and the turnips (slightly
caramelised, I imagine) giving a rich sweetness in a rather different
direction. Completely off the wall suggestion. A big young Anjou villages.
--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Salut/Hi Tom S,

le/on Fri, 13 Feb 2004 02:52:54 GMT, tu disais/you said:-

>
>"Ian Hoare" > wrote in message
>news
>> > One of the key events that helped trigger it
>> >was a French vet returning
>> >home in 1918 and killing his family while drunk on anisette (or however
>> >the triply distilled liquor with worm wood is spelled)
>>
>> I think you're probably thinking of absinthe.
>
>And I was led to believe that absinthe makes the heart grow _fonder_! ;^D
>
>(Sorry - couldn't pass that by.)

Nope, that's absence. Absinthe spoonerises it.

(I drive a Honda).

--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 11:31:06 +0100, Ian Hoare > said:
[]
] >Back onT: just tried to find the wine to match rabbit with turnips and =
calvados;
] >attempted a '98 Rasteau (La Soumade Confiance) in the hope of standing u=
p to
] >it, with weak results: it wilted in front of its adversary. Any ideas f=
or what I might=20
] >have tried? "Really big" was a proverbial spam advertizement...
]=20
] I don't do bunny like that, (I'm not over fond of turnips) although we do=
a
] recipe where it's marinated in red wine and cooked in that, with prunes. I
] also do a recipe for Mouton =E0 la Poitevine, where slices of mutton leg =
are
] stewed with cognac and garlic - a lot of garlic - a GREAT deal of garlic.
] For the bunny, I serve a random red, something like Tour des Gendres Cuv=
=E9e
] classique. For the mutton (not lamb, btw) I use a far bigger wine, a madi=
ran
] or a big cahors. Until Oullins, I didn't have much Rhone wine. Intersting
] dilemma, with the calva pushing one way and the turnips (slightly
] caramelised, I imagine) giving a rich sweetness in a rather different
] direction. Completely off the wall suggestion. A big young Anjou villages=
.. =20
[]

Well, this is honestly a pretty massive Rasteau, bigger than any Cahors I=20
can think of.

The bunny was a spur of the moment thing, as I discovered some fresh young
ones next to my regular rabbit guy at market. He also had some red onions;
thus the obligatory bacon, some fresh rosemary, and when I was reaching for
cognac from the bar I hit a fruity young calva instead, and decided it would
flatter the sweetness of the turnips -- a bit carmelized as you guessed.
Hap hazard cooking, but the kids loved it at our weekly "family dinner."
Never made it before, nor maybe ever again, but that's part of the fun, rig=
ht?=20

I think the young Anjou is maybe a decent idea. Come to think of it, we've
a good local stout (made by an english couple installed as "le brewery") th=
at
would have gone as well as anything.

-E

--=20
Emery Davis
You can reply to
by removing the well known companies

Ian Hoare wrote:

>With one of my fellow countrymen jailed for several weeks for making asinine
>remarks to a customs official, I'm NOT about to smuggle alcohol. I already
>bring "canned goods" (foie gras, confit etc) in which I can reasonably claim
>to have described adequately, but if I got caught bringing _alcohol_
>undeclared into MA, I would have the lot confiscated, and at $50-$60 a
>bottle, and $30-$40 a can, the risk isn't worth it.
>
>

I have brought a lot of wine into the US and never had a problem with customs
but have had problems with state officials. I brought a case of Grange into
Hawaii and I had to pay for an importer's license (7 day permit was $14us)
In Texas their state tax was more than the value of the wine.

Salut/Hi Bill,

le/on Fri, 13 Feb 2004 22:18:52 GMT, tu disais/you said:-

>Ian Hoare wrote:
>
>>With one of my fellow countrymen jailed for several weeks for making asinine
>>remarks to a customs official, I'm NOT about to smuggle alcohol. I already
>>bring "canned goods" (foie gras, confit etc) in which I can reasonably claim
>>to have described adequately, but if I got caught bringing _alcohol_
>>undeclared into MA, I would have the lot confiscated, and at $50-$60 a
>>bottle, and $30-$40 a can, the risk isn't worth it.
>>
>>
>
>I have brought a lot of wine into the US and never had a problem with customs
>but have had problems with state officials. I brought a case of Grange into
>Hawaii and I had to pay for an importer's license (7 day permit was $14us)
>In Texas their state tax was more than the value of the wine.

You're American, Bill. As a "furriner" I cannot bring one single bottle into
MA (we were visiting a friend in Boston. I spent 20 minutes frothing at the
mouth to the Customs person at the US emabassy in Paris, trying to find out
what I could legally bring in. NONE duty free, NONE paying duty, NONE under
any circumstances. Even if I choose to fly into a state with less
puritanical rules, I would then have to be 100% certain that I knew what
rules applied in every state through which I was passing on my way to visit
(say) Vino in Seattle or Bill in Vancouver. While YOU as a Murrican might be
prepared to take the risk of committing a felony, I as a furriner, living in
France.... NO way, José.



--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Salut/Hi Anders Tørneskog,

le/on Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:35:03 GMT, tu disais/you said:-

>
>"Ian Hoare" > wrote in message
>news
>> Restrictions - some severe - have been in place in several Nordic
>countries,
>> and I expect Nils and Anders could tell us more, but I don't think any of
>> them had a global ban.
>>
>Norway had prohibition of liquor and fortified wine from 1917 to 1927,

But not beer or ordinary wine. So it's not really the same as the total
prohibition in the US.

>cure for any conceivable ill (flu, fevers, diabetes or menstruation...) a
>total of 650.000 litres of hard liquor on "blue prescriptions" i.e.
>partially paid for by the state(!!) in 1921 (in a country of 4 million
>people!).

One way of bumping up the demand for the "hard stuff" ;-))

--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Ian Hoare wrote:

>You're American, Bill. As a "furriner" I cannot bring one single bottle into
>MA (we were visiting a friend in Boston. I spent 20 minutes frothing at the
>mouth to the Customs person at the US emabassy in Paris, trying to find out
>what I could legally bring in. NONE duty free, NONE paying duty, NONE under
>any circumstances. Even if I choose to fly into a state with less
>puritanical rules, I would then have to be 100% certain that I knew what
>rules applied in every state through which I was passing on my way to visit
>(say) Vino in Seattle or Bill in Vancouver. While YOU as a Murrican might be
>prepared to take the risk of committing a felony, I as a furriner, living in
>France.... NO way, José.
>
>
I had no idea that you were on the terrorist list Ian. I had no idea that furriners
could not be treated by the same rules us natives are. I took 6 bottles of Zinfandel
into Australia a few years back and no one blinked an eye. I thought that I
understood the US laws but this one baffles me.

Salut/Hi Bill,

le/on Sat, 14 Feb 2004 15:10:39 GMT, tu disais/you said:-

>>what I could legally bring in. NONE duty free, NONE paying duty, NONE under
>>any circumstances. Even if I choose to fly into a state with less
>>puritanical rules, I would then have to be 100% certain that I knew what
>>rules applied in every state through which I was passing on my way to visit
>>(say) Vino in Seattle or Bill in Vancouver. While YOU as a Murrican might be
>>prepared to take the risk of committing a felony, I as a furriner, living in
>>France.... NO way, José.

>I had no idea that you were on the terrorist list Ian.

Well, there are some here who would probably regard me as little better!

> I had no idea that furriners could not be treated by the same rules us natives are

I have to say I was both hurt, furious and smarting under a deep sense of
injustice. I DID smuggle in one single half litre, because I was invited by
a friend who adores good wines, and was going to produce some extremely rare
gems, but I was sweating more than a little. US customs, Dept of agriculture
and immigration were pretty intimidating even to me (and I'm not easily
impressed) as a furriner, you know. It's not the best introduction to the
good old US of A!

>I took 6 bottles of Zinfandel into Australia a few years back and no one blinked an eye. I thought that I
>understood the US laws but this one baffles me.

I have little doubt that it comes down to a pretty evil combination of
puritanism (history), parochialism (if the Federal Gvt allows it, WE won't),
greed (some states want to keep the monopoly of alcohol sales) and the pork
barrel (wholesalers who claim that the youth of the nation will be
hopelessly corrupted). Apart from the most extreme Muslim countries, the USA
has THE most draconian import rules in the world.

I try to be understanding, but it can be hard, Bill.

--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

On 2/14/04 10:10 AM, in article , "Bill"
> wrote:

> Ian Hoare wrote:
>
>> You're American, Bill. As a "furriner" I cannot bring one single bottle into
>> MA (we were visiting a friend in Boston. I spent 20 minutes frothing at the
>> mouth to the Customs person at the US emabassy in Paris, trying to find out
>> what I could legally bring in. NONE duty free, NONE paying duty, NONE under
>> any circumstances. Even if I choose to fly into a state with less
>> puritanical rules, I would then have to be 100% certain that I knew what
>> rules applied in every state through which I was passing on my way to visit
>> (say) Vino in Seattle or Bill in Vancouver. While YOU as a Murrican might be
>> prepared to take the risk of committing a felony, I as a furriner, living in
>> France.... NO way, José.
>>
>>
> I had no idea that you were on the terrorist list Ian. I had no idea that
> furriners
> could not be treated by the same rules us natives are. I took 6 bottles of
> Zinfandel
> into Australia a few years back and no one blinked an eye. I thought that I
> understood the US laws but this one baffles me.

Customs regulations for people landing in the US should apply uniformly.
Here is a link to the US customs site that should clarify. It seems to me
that the customs agent was not obeying the regulations. You could file a
complaint and apply for damages.

http://www.customs.ustreas.gov/xp/cgov/travel/

"Bromo" wrote in message......
> It seems to me that the customs agent was not obeying the
> regulations. You could file a complaint and apply for damages.
>

Copied from the suggested web-site......

Alcoholic Beverages

Nonresidents who are at least 21 years old may bring in, free of duty and
Internal Revenue Tax, up to one liter of alcoholic beverage--beer, wine,
liquor--for personal use. Quantities above the one-liter limitation are
subject to duty and internal revenue tax.



In addition to federal laws, you must also meet state alcoholic beverage
laws, which may be more restrictive than federal laws. This means that if
the state in which you arrive permits less liquor, wine, or beer than you
have legally brought into the United States, that state's laws apply to your
importation of alcoholic beverages for personal use.





I disagree with Ian on one point though.



It appears that in Massachusetts, the zero tolerance law applies to
residents and nonresidents alike,



An interesting article appears at



http://www.beveragebusiness.com/art-arch/sstone09.html



The thought of alcho-police sitting around writing the tag numbers of
interstate cars outside wine shops did bring a smile to my face!!!!!



--



st.helier

Likely issue as Ian is probably on the list of persons making to many
Anti-American Statements and therefore subject to stiffer rules. :-)




"st.helier" > wrote in message
...
> "Bromo" wrote in message......
> > It seems to me that the customs agent was not obeying the
> > regulations. You could file a complaint and apply for damages.
> >
>
> Copied from the suggested web-site......
>
> Alcoholic Beverages
>
> Nonresidents who are at least 21 years old may bring in, free of duty and
> Internal Revenue Tax, up to one liter of alcoholic beverage--beer, wine,
> liquor--for personal use. Quantities above the one-liter limitation are
> subject to duty and internal revenue tax.
>
>
>
> In addition to federal laws, you must also meet state alcoholic beverage
> laws, which may be more restrictive than federal laws. This means that if
> the state in which you arrive permits less liquor, wine, or beer than you
> have legally brought into the United States, that state's laws apply to
your
> importation of alcoholic beverages for personal use.
>
>
>
>
>
> I disagree with Ian on one point though.
>
>
>
> It appears that in Massachusetts, the zero tolerance law applies to
> residents and nonresidents alike,
>
>
>
> An interesting article appears at
>
>
>
> http://www.beveragebusiness.com/art-arch/sstone09.html
>
>
>
> The thought of alcho-police sitting around writing the tag numbers of
> interstate cars outside wine shops did bring a smile to my face!!!!!
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> st.helier
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Salut/Hi Bromo,

le/on Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:13:23 GMT, tu disais/you said:-

>On 2/14/04 10:10 AM, in article , "Bill"
> wrote:

>> into Australia a few years back and no one blinked an eye. I thought that I
>> understood the US laws but this one baffles me.
>
>Customs regulations for people landing in the US should apply uniformly.
>Here is a link to the US customs site that should clarify. It seems to me
>that the customs agent was not obeying the regulations. You could file a
>complaint and apply for damages.

No, Bromo, sadly, state law can override Federal law. And in any case, can
you imagine the scenario? I'm stopped by a customs agent, he finds wine, and
then I insist on his name so that I can file a complaint.

HOW many weeks would it take me to get out of customs?



--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

>I have to say I was both hurt, furious and smarting under a deep sense of
>injustice.

FWIW Ian, I have friends from the UK, Sweden, Norway and Italy who visit on a
fairly regular basis and they always bring wine and have never had a problem.
In many cases even the duty was waived since they were only bringing 4-5 750 ml
bottles. Additionally there aren't any roadblocks, checkpoints or
bordercrossing points between the states. Often except for a road sign on the
interstate highway you aren't really aware that you're in another State so
unless you committed a serious crime I'm sure that you wouldn't even show up on
the radar screen.
Bi!!

Ian Hoare > wrote in
:


> I have to say I was both hurt, furious and smarting under a deep sense
> of injustice. I DID smuggle in one single half litre, because I was
> invited by a friend who adores good wines, and was going to produce
> some extremely rare gems, but I was sweating more than a little. US
> customs, Dept of agriculture
USDA is one of the worst at making anyone feel at home. They have even
given me grief over sealed bags of dog food made in the USA that I take
with me when flying with the pooch. And a word of caution never
knowingly admit to having visited a farm!!! being the son in law to
Osama bin Laden would be better than to be a farm visitor.

and immigration were pretty intimidating
> even to me (and I'm not easily impressed) as a furriner, you know.
> It's not the best introduction to the good old US of A!
>

jcoulter wrote:

>USDA is one of the worst at making anyone feel at home. They have even
>given me grief over sealed bags of dog food made in the USA that I take
>with me when flying with the pooch. And a word of caution never
>knowingly admit to having visited a farm!!! being the son in law to
>Osama bin Laden would be better than to be a farm visitor.
>
>
>
Try entering New Zealand if you know how to spell horse. And of course
you have to be
sprayed for bugs before you can get off the airplane.

On 2/14/04 12:47 PM, in article ,
"Ian Hoare" > wrote:

> Salut/Hi Bromo,
>
> le/on Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:13:23 GMT, tu disais/you said:-
>
>> On 2/14/04 10:10 AM, in article , "Bill"
>> > wrote:
>
>>> into Australia a few years back and no one blinked an eye. I thought that I
>>> understood the US laws but this one baffles me.
>>
>> Customs regulations for people landing in the US should apply uniformly.
>> Here is a link to the US customs site that should clarify. It seems to me
>> that the customs agent was not obeying the regulations. You could file a
>> complaint and apply for damages.
>
> No, Bromo, sadly, state law can override Federal law. And in any case, can
> you imagine the scenario? I'm stopped by a customs agent, he finds wine, and
> then I insist on his name so that I can file a complaint.

I am wrong - sorry.

>
> HOW many weeks would it take me to get out of customs?

Dunno.

Sorry to disagree. State Law never overrides Federal Law. In there is a
governing Federal Law in the USA it always supercedes state laws.

Even on Wine.

It just so happens most laws on alcohol are a states rights issue. However
in the case of what you are allowed to bring into this country will be the
same no matter what airport you fly into. If would be uniform if you were
landing in NYC, Boston, Seattle or Jackson Ms.

Sorry to disagree. Federal laws and federal constitution is law of the
land. States may not like.

If you call your airline you are traveling on they can give you the rules.
Even as a foreigner you can bring in wine. Unless you are Moslem...then all
bets are off.:-)


"Ian Hoare" > wrote in message
...
> Salut/Hi Bromo,
>
> le/on Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:13:23 GMT, tu disais/you said:-
>
> >On 2/14/04 10:10 AM, in article , "Bill"
> > wrote:
>
> >> into Australia a few years back and no one blinked an eye. I thought
that I
> >> understood the US laws but this one baffles me.
> >
> >Customs regulations for people landing in the US should apply uniformly.
> >Here is a link to the US customs site that should clarify. It seems to
me
> >that the customs agent was not obeying the regulations. You could file a
> >complaint and apply for damages.
>
> No, Bromo, sadly, state law can override Federal law. And in any case, can
> you imagine the scenario? I'm stopped by a customs agent, he finds wine,
and
> then I insist on his name so that I can file a complaint.
>
> HOW many weeks would it take me to get out of customs?
>
>
>
> --
> All the Best
> Ian Hoare
> http://www.souvigne.com
> mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Bill wrote:

> jcoulter wrote:
>
>>USDA is one of the worst at making anyone feel at home. They have even
>>given me grief over sealed bags of dog food made in the USA that I take
>>with me when flying with the pooch. And a word of caution never
>>knowingly admit to having visited a farm!!! being the son in law to
>>Osama bin Laden would be better than to be a farm visitor.
>>
>>
>>
> Try entering New Zealand if you know how to spell horse. And of course
> you have to be
> sprayed for bugs before you can get off the airplane.
>

This is an exaggeration:

"These days you will rarely see MAF Quarantine Officers spraying
arriving aircraft before the passengers and crew disembark. This is
because most airlines now either treat their aircraft with a residual
insecticide or undertake spraying in-flight. Both methods are approved
by MAF and the World Health Organisation (WHO)."

Quote from Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF)website.

--brian


--
Brian Boutel
Wellington New Zealand


Note the NOSPAM

Just found out that if the bottle is opened - all bets are off - you cannot
bring an open bottle of alcohol into the US.

On 2/14/04 8:20 PM, in article
et, "dick"
> wrote:

> Sorry to disagree. State Law never overrides Federal Law. In there is a
> governing Federal Law in the USA it always supercedes state laws.
>
> Even on Wine.
>
> It just so happens most laws on alcohol are a states rights issue. However
> in the case of what you are allowed to bring into this country will be the
> same no matter what airport you fly into. If would be uniform if you were
> landing in NYC, Boston, Seattle or Jackson Ms.
>
> Sorry to disagree. Federal laws and federal constitution is law of the
> land. States may not like.
>
> If you call your airline you are traveling on they can give you the rules.
> Even as a foreigner you can bring in wine. Unless you are Moslem...then all
> bets are off.:-)
>
>
> "Ian Hoare" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Salut/Hi Bromo,
>>
>> le/on Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:13:23 GMT, tu disais/you said:-
>>
>>> On 2/14/04 10:10 AM, in article , "Bill"
>>> > wrote:
>>
>>>> into Australia a few years back and no one blinked an eye. I thought
> that I
>>>> understood the US laws but this one baffles me.
>>>
>>> Customs regulations for people landing in the US should apply uniformly.
>>> Here is a link to the US customs site that should clarify. It seems to
> me
>>> that the customs agent was not obeying the regulations. You could file a
>>> complaint and apply for damages.
>>
>> No, Bromo, sadly, state law can override Federal law. And in any case, can
>> you imagine the scenario? I'm stopped by a customs agent, he finds wine,
> and
>> then I insist on his name so that I can file a complaint.
>>
>> HOW many weeks would it take me to get out of customs?
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> All the Best
>> Ian Hoare
>> http://www.souvigne.com
>> mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website
>
>

I would imagine that is true. In fact, when I was traveling a few weeks ago
Airport security would not allow me to bring an open bottle of water through
security.

That said, I was responding to the issue of state law rules over federal.
Not true.

"Bromo" > wrote in message
...
> Just found out that if the bottle is opened - all bets are off - you
cannot
> bring an open bottle of alcohol into the US.
>
> On 2/14/04 8:20 PM, in article
> et, "dick"
> > wrote:
>
> > Sorry to disagree. State Law never overrides Federal Law. In there is a
> > governing Federal Law in the USA it always supercedes state laws.
> >
> > Even on Wine.
> >
> > It just so happens most laws on alcohol are a states rights issue.
However
> > in the case of what you are allowed to bring into this country will be
the
> > same no matter what airport you fly into. If would be uniform if you
were
> > landing in NYC, Boston, Seattle or Jackson Ms.
> >
> > Sorry to disagree. Federal laws and federal constitution is law of the
> > land. States may not like.
> >
> > If you call your airline you are traveling on they can give you the
rules.
> > Even as a foreigner you can bring in wine. Unless you are Moslem...then
all
> > bets are off.:-)
> >
> >
> > "Ian Hoare" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Salut/Hi Bromo,
> >>
> >> le/on Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:13:23 GMT, tu disais/you said:-
> >>
> >>> On 2/14/04 10:10 AM, in article , "Bill"
> >>> > wrote:
> >>
> >>>> into Australia a few years back and no one blinked an eye. I thought
> > that I
> >>>> understood the US laws but this one baffles me.
> >>>
> >>> Customs regulations for people landing in the US should apply
uniformly.
> >>> Here is a link to the US customs site that should clarify. It seems
to
> > me
> >>> that the customs agent was not obeying the regulations. You could
file a
> >>> complaint and apply for damages.
> >>
> >> No, Bromo, sadly, state law can override Federal law. And in any case,
can
> >> you imagine the scenario? I'm stopped by a customs agent, he finds
wine,
> > and
> >> then I insist on his name so that I can file a complaint.
> >>
> >> HOW many weeks would it take me to get out of customs?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> All the Best
> >> Ian Hoare
> >> http://www.souvigne.com
> >> mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website
> >
> >
>

"dick" wrote......

> Sorry to disagree. State Law never overrides Federal Law.

However, according to this piece, Federal Law will be read along side State
Law, and in some cases, State Law may have extra restrictions which must be
adhered to.

"In addition to federal laws, you must also meet state alcoholic beverage
laws, which may be more restrictive than federal laws.

This means that if the state in which you arrive permits less liquor, wine,
or beer than you have legally brought into the United States, that state's
laws apply to your importation of alcoholic beverages for personal use."

Thus, in the example which Ian quotes, that is entering the USA through
Boston, Massachusetts, the quantity of liquor, beer or wine allowed to be
imported, by resident or non-resident is ZERO.

--

st.helier

I stand corrected.

However, I would highly suggest checking with the Airline on this matter.

Mass. Law also states that you cannot utilize common carrier to ship. What
it allows a person to carry may differ...

But I do stand on the point that Federal Law supercedes State law. However
in this case Federal Law Stipulates to state rights on Booze. (Nice
leftovers of the Prohibition Era)




"st.helier" > wrote in message
...
> "dick" wrote......
>
> > Sorry to disagree. State Law never overrides Federal Law.
>
> However, according to this piece, Federal Law will be read along side
State
> Law, and in some cases, State Law may have extra restrictions which must
be
> adhered to.
>
> "In addition to federal laws, you must also meet state alcoholic beverage
> laws, which may be more restrictive than federal laws.
>
> This means that if the state in which you arrive permits less liquor,
wine,
> or beer than you have legally brought into the United States, that state's
> laws apply to your importation of alcoholic beverages for personal use."
>
> Thus, in the example which Ian quotes, that is entering the USA through
> Boston, Massachusetts, the quantity of liquor, beer or wine allowed to be
> imported, by resident or non-resident is ZERO.
>
> --
>
> st.helier
>
>

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:20:01 +1300, "st.helier" > said:

] "dick" wrote......
]
][blah blah snipped]

I suggest respectfully that we put the sorry subject to rest...

Different Customs Agents quoting different regs is classic. Try arguing
with one using the opinion of another, I guarantee you that you'll be there
for a while. (As Ian intimated).

My experience both pre and post 9/11 at Boston Logan is that there is no
problem at all bringing a couple of bottles in. Ian, I think you worry too much,
but up to you of course.

Some parisian-american friends recently brought a 5 l BiB to NY (against my advice)
because of the high price of juice in town. They had now problem, the thing was
checked.

However, Ian, as some other poster mentioned, never admit to having been on a farm.
I did once after having visited my sister's in Wales, they confiscated my (clean) boots
and made me wait 3 hours for their return; really clean, they had been microwaved and
cleaned with toothpicks, apparently. That's service! (Kennedy, not Logan, for that one).

-E

--
Emery Davis
You can reply to
by removing the well known companies

In article >, (RV
WRLee) writes:

>FWIW Ian, I have friends from the UK, Sweden, Norway and Italy who visit on a
>fairly regular basis and they always bring wine and have never had a problem.
>In many cases even the duty was waived since they were only bringing 4-5 750
>ml
>bottles. Additionally there aren't any roadblocks, checkpoints or
>bordercrossing points between the states. Often except for a road sign on
>the
>interstate highway you aren't really aware that you're in another State so
>unless you committed a serious crime I'm sure that you wouldn't even show up
>on
>the radar screen.

Yes, I have French friends who visit , and always bring wine. Never had a
problem. I guess difference between flying into to Boston vs. Newark or JFK.


Dale

Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply

On 2/14/04 11:20 PM, in article ,
"st.helier" > wrote:

> "dick" wrote......
>
>> Sorry to disagree. State Law never overrides Federal Law.
>
> However, according to this piece, Federal Law will be read along side State
> Law, and in some cases, State Law may have extra restrictions which must be
> adhered to.
>
> "In addition to federal laws, you must also meet state alcoholic beverage
> laws, which may be more restrictive than federal laws.
>
> This means that if the state in which you arrive permits less liquor, wine,
> or beer than you have legally brought into the United States, that state's
> laws apply to your importation of alcoholic beverages for personal use."
>
> Thus, in the example which Ian quotes, that is entering the USA through
> Boston, Massachusetts, the quantity of liquor, beer or wine allowed to be
> imported, by resident or non-resident is ZERO.

Alcohol is the only item that has its own funky rules. I am sure this
applies to people driving into Mass as well - though there are no
checkpoints and I doubt anyone who resides in Mass knows about it (and if it
were universally enforced, can you imagine how fast that restriction would
be lifted?).

Sorry about your loss - this seems to be a rather exceptional case.

On 2/14/04 11:52 PM, in article
et, "dick"
> wrote:

> I stand corrected.
>
> However, I would highly suggest checking with the Airline on this matter.
>
> Mass. Law also states that you cannot utilize common carrier to ship. What
> it allows a person to carry may differ...
>
> But I do stand on the point that Federal Law supercedes State law. However
> in this case Federal Law Stipulates to state rights on Booze. (Nice
> leftovers of the Prohibition Era)

Interestingly enough, there is a case going to the Supreme Court saying that
some of those restrictions (like the ones involving felonies) might not be
constitutional, even with the detritus left over form the removal of the
Volstead Act (Prohibition). I understand this goes to the Supreme court all
the time.

It got brought up with internet sales of wine and liquor. The States want
to collect sales tax on any things bought in the internet, declaring items
are bought "in the state" but when it comes to alcohol, want to make it not
so so they can prohibit importation by common carrier (though person to
person shipping not involving the exchange of money may be an exception).
The various lawyers and so on will make the criminalizing of this activity
(they will bring the seller up on felony charges - and have done so) illegal
even under the current constitutional regulations.

On 2/15/04 8:54 AM, in article ,
"Dale Williams" > wrote:

> In article >, (RV
> WRLee) writes:
>
>> FWIW Ian, I have friends from the UK, Sweden, Norway and Italy who visit on a
>> fairly regular basis and they always bring wine and have never had a problem.
>> In many cases even the duty was waived since they were only bringing 4-5 750
>> ml
>> bottles. Additionally there aren't any roadblocks, checkpoints or
>> bordercrossing points between the states. Often except for a road sign on
>> the
>> interstate highway you aren't really aware that you're in another State so
>> unless you committed a serious crime I'm sure that you wouldn't even show up
>> on
>> the radar screen.
>
> Yes, I have French friends who visit , and always bring wine. Never had a
> problem. I guess difference between flying into to Boston vs. Newark or JFK.

Interesting - I have had friends fly Virgin to and from the UK and came back
laden with Single Malt - paid duty on it and went on through.

Funny 'ol world. This was before 9/11 though.

In September 2003 I was in Boston for a wedding in family. Brought with me
1 case of champagne and no problem.

Some 8 years ago returning from France my wife and I were re-routed through
Logan and remained there overnight. I was carrying on almost a case of wine
between the two of us from Burg.

No issue clearing customs.

I would have been ****ed if there was an issue and can understand being
cautious. But I don't really think there is much to worry about.

#1-Practical sense tells me that the Customs Officers represent Federal Gov.
not State and they DO NOT enforce State if they are Fed. Agents.

#2-State does not have enough money to enforce. They probably have less
than 10 persons statewide on this from State employees.

#3. Finally North Carolina, where I live, has laws on books regarding the
criminalization on sex. Other than missionary position you cannot engaged
lawfully with women on top, woman must be your wife, all other forms of sex,
oral and otherwise constitute a criminal offense.

My guess is both wine and sex enforcement would be about the
same....virtually non-existent.



"Bromo" > wrote in message
...
> On 2/14/04 11:20 PM, in article ,
> "st.helier" > wrote:
>
> > "dick" wrote......
> >
> >> Sorry to disagree. State Law never overrides Federal Law.
> >
> > However, according to this piece, Federal Law will be read along side
State
> > Law, and in some cases, State Law may have extra restrictions which must
be
> > adhered to.
> >
> > "In addition to federal laws, you must also meet state alcoholic
beverage
> > laws, which may be more restrictive than federal laws.
> >
> > This means that if the state in which you arrive permits less liquor,
wine,
> > or beer than you have legally brought into the United States, that
state's
> > laws apply to your importation of alcoholic beverages for personal use."
> >
> > Thus, in the example which Ian quotes, that is entering the USA through
> > Boston, Massachusetts, the quantity of liquor, beer or wine allowed to
be
> > imported, by resident or non-resident is ZERO.
>
> Alcohol is the only item that has its own funky rules. I am sure this
> applies to people driving into Mass as well - though there are no
> checkpoints and I doubt anyone who resides in Mass knows about it (and if
it
> were universally enforced, can you imagine how fast that restriction would
> be lifted?).
>
> Sorry about your loss - this seems to be a rather exceptional case.
>

On 2/10/04 8:32 AM, in article ,
"Ian Hoare" > wrote:

> Salut/Hi Zed,
>
> le/on Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:05:34 GMT, tu disais/you said:-
>
>> I came accross this article on Winespectator.
>> http://www.winespectator.com/Wine/Da...5,2337,00.html
>>
>> New legislation will permit people to take home unfinished bottles of
>> wines in restaurants.
>>
>> I think it's a pretty good idea, less drunks on the road. More
>> flexibility to customers.
>>
>> Anyone knows if Canada or more specifically Ontario has similar laws?
>> and:
>> What if you really like a bottle of wine and you know it's not
>> available anywhere else, can you purchase a bottle?
>>
>
> For what it's worth, in France this has never been an issue. In fact I find
> it utterly bizarre that anyone should seek to prevent you doing so.

I know that in Indiana there are "open container" laws for vehicles and
sometimes on the street. They are only occasionally enforced.

On 2/10/04 10:19 AM, in article , "George
Cutshaw" > wrote:

>>
>> For what it's worth, in France this has never been an issue. In fact I
> find
>> it utterly bizarre that anyone should seek to prevent you doing so.
>
> Agreed, but here in the U.S., our liquor laws are a draconian holdover of
> prohibition and were influenced by the mob-turned-distributors (Joseph P.
> Kennedy for one). We claim to be a "free country," but as you know we are
> definitely not.

Prohibition is *slowly* being dismantled - but the damage was done.

On 2/10/04 12:34 PM, in article , "Pantheras"
> wrote:

> Mark Lipton wrote:
>
>> Though certainly no apologist, I shall attempt to illustrate the "logic,"
>> such
>> as it is. In every state I've lived in, liquor licenses are subdivided into
>> several different categories. Typically, there is one type for restaurants
>> and bars (with a further division based on the serving of hard alcohol) and
>> another type for liquor stores. The distinction lies in whether the customer
>> can consume the beverage on the premises and/or whether the customer can
>> remove the beverage from the place of purchase. In some states, you'll see
>> signs for "bar/package store" or the like, which indicates that the owners
>> have both types of license. Thus, it's in the economic interest of the
>> government to forbid the removal of alcohol from a restaurant unless the
>> restaurant invests in a second (and typically far more expensive) liquor
>> license. As in all matters alcoholic, it's a tangle of the puritanical
>> blue
>> laws and the greed of those who've found profitable niches in the
>> "three-tier"
>> system. We'll see how much opposition this proposed law encounters in the
>> NY
>> legislature...
>>
>
> Mark, I am sure that most of us reading your detailed and excellent
> explanation (some what like a chemistry
> professor might do) were skipping ahead to think about places we have
> been with both On and Off licenses.
> And of course the idea that that would make it legal to take the bottle
> home. But wait, most of the southern
> states have a law that prohibits transporting alcohol unless the tax
> stamp is intact and the bottle has not been
> opened in any way. All this goes back to moonshine days and that was the
> law they charged them with.

And sometimes it is an attempt to prevent drinking and driving at the same
time. At least that is how the anti-opened-container-in-the-car laws were
explained to me. Each state is different - and there is a thicket of
container laws (opened, closed, in a car, not in car, with driver, with
passenger, public intoxication, and so on) and license categories all trying
to appease people (Prohibitionists) after and before Prohibition.

There are some counties in Tennessee that are *still* "dry" counties - where
even the possession of alcohol is a crime - though rarely enforced. Though
the liquor stores just over the county lines tend to do rather well.

And here in NY, they just changed a law that closed liquor stores on Sunday,
now the liquor store can open any 6 days in a week *if* they register for
such. There are a couple that are open on Sunday and closed on Monday.

On 2/10/04 12:39 PM, in article
.net, "dick"
> wrote:

> I have lived in Florida, Ga, Ms and currently North Carolina. There is
> usually a max like 2 cases in NC that you can travel with.
>
> I usually go to South Carolina and buy 2 cases of wine at least 2x per year.
> I have seen officers watch people leave the wine/ liquor store just over the
> border and confiscate wine/liquor.

Wonder who gets the wine? Hmmmmm?

On 2/11/04 1:17 AM, in article
, "Tom S"
> wrote:

>
> Agreed, Ian. France never had prohibition though, and there are some
> misguided zealots here in the US who would like to bring it _back_! If I'm
> not mistaken, the county that the Jack Daniels distillery resides in is
> "dry", as is the entire State of Kansas

Kansas is no longer a dry state, I think it was the late 40's or early 50's
when it was repealed. They were the first state to have Prohibition.
Mississippi was the last state to remove prohibition (in 1966).

For importation of wines -

Also keep in mind that you were given the party line - the true regulations.
It is likely you will see a lot of folks bringing bottles in no-problem. It
is likely that the Mass rules won't be enforced as much as the US rules.

Still, a risk.

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 14:28:02 GMT, "dick" > wrote:


>
>#3. Finally North Carolina, where I live, has laws on books regarding the
>criminalization on sex. Other than missionary position you cannot engaged
>lawfully with women on top,

considering teh 49% obesity rate, that may ne a good thing :-)
Zed



---
"Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups:
Alcohol, Caffeine, Sugar & Fat"

I see you have been here.

"Zed" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 14:28:02 GMT, "dick" > wrote:
>
>
> >
> >#3. Finally North Carolina, where I live, has laws on books regarding
the
> >criminalization on sex. Other than missionary position you cannot
engaged
> >lawfully with women on top,
>
> considering teh 49% obesity rate, that may ne a good thing :-)
> Zed
>
>
>
> ---
> "Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food
groups:
> Alcohol, Caffeine, Sugar & Fat"

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:20:27 GMT, "dick" > wrote:

>Sorry to disagree. State Law never overrides Federal Law. In there is a
>governing Federal Law in the USA it always supercedes state laws.
>
>Even on Wine.
>
>It just so happens most laws on alcohol are a states rights issue. However
>in the case of what you are allowed to bring into this country will be the
>same no matter what airport you fly into. If would be uniform if you were
>landing in NYC, Boston, Seattle or Jackson Ms.
>
>Sorry to disagree. Federal laws and federal constitution is law of the
>land. States may not like.
>
Not exactly. In some cases a state can pass a law that is more
restrictive than, but does not conflict with, any applicable federal
law, and such a law can be enforced by the state. However, the federal
government can then turn around and pass a law that overrides that
law. This is essentially what happened when Congress passed a law
overriding laws in certain states that prohibited shipments of wine to
consumers in those states. The law applies only to those states that
allow an individual to bring wine into the state by other means (some
states prohibit this completely) and applies only when the individual
purchases wine at a winery or tasting room and ships it to himself.
The law was passed at the behest of (mostly) small California wineries
that depend heavily on sales in their tasting rooms. They were losing
a lot of business because out-of-state visitors were reluctant to buy
wine that they would then have to take back home on an airplane.

The situation is complicated for alcoholic beverages because the
amendment that repealed prohibition gave the states certain rights
regarding the interstate shipment of such products that they don't
have with regard to any other type of product, thanks to the
interstate commerce clause in the constitution.

Non-US citizens following this thread probably believe that we in the
US have a lot of crazy laws regarding alcohol. Guess what? You're
right.

Vino
To reply, add "x" between
letters and numbers of
e-mail address.

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:20:01 +1300, "st.helier"
> wrote:

>"dick" wrote......
>
>> Sorry to disagree. State Law never overrides Federal Law.
>
>However, according to this piece, Federal Law will be read along side State
>Law, and in some cases, State Law may have extra restrictions which must be
>adhered to.
>
>"In addition to federal laws, you must also meet state alcoholic beverage
>laws, which may be more restrictive than federal laws.
>
>This means that if the state in which you arrive permits less liquor, wine,
>or beer than you have legally brought into the United States, that state's
>laws apply to your importation of alcoholic beverages for personal use."
>
>Thus, in the example which Ian quotes, that is entering the USA through
>Boston, Massachusetts, the quantity of liquor, beer or wine allowed to be
>imported, by resident or non-resident is ZERO.

What you say is true, but it is generally not the responsibility of US
Customs agents to enforce state laws. But who knows what kind of
informal agreements might have been made between different law
enforcement agencies?

Vino
To reply, add "x" between
letters and numbers of
e-mail address.

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 00:16:23 +0100, Ian Hoare >
wrote:

<snip>
>Even if I choose to fly into a state with less
>puritanical rules, I would then have to be 100% certain that I knew what
>rules applied in every state through which I was passing on my way to visit
>(say) Vino in Seattle or Bill in Vancouver.

The Vancouver that Bill lives in is in Canada, Ian, although there is
one in Washington State. But I'm sure you knew that. Getting wine into
Canada from the US could be the subject of another long discussion,
but let's don't go there.

Vino
To reply, add "x" between
letters and numbers of
e-mail address.